If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Comment

• Wisconsin senior OLG John Moffitt does not look the part with a bad body that looks like it has not seen the weight room, but he has natural girth and scouts say he plays better than he looks, competing hard on Saturdays and having the versatility to play either guard or center. He has warranted some fourth-round grades from evaluators in a typically weak guard class. He has been very durable throughout his career and has been a rock on an offensive line that has keyed the Badgers' success this season. When the Badgers have needed yardage on the ground, they have consistently run left this season.

Defensive tackle Jared Crick: With eight tackles, a hurry and a sack, he flashed some real potential as a 3-4 defensive end Saturday, if you ask me. Crick is a better outside rusher because he can set up a tackle with that quick first step, then blast back inside with a strong bull rush when the tackle overcompensates. NU may not use that 3-2-6 defense again this year – or ever – but Crick gave NFL scouts something to chew on. He could still use one more year in college.
Cornerback Ciante Evans: He needs to fight off blocks a little better when a quarterback is loose and scrambling, but Evans is a cold-blooded baller as a cover corner. He rarely allowed his man to fight back across his face on deep routes, and his positioning took away that back-shoulder throw, too. Evans has learned Marvin Sanders' lessons quickly, using the sideline as an extra defender.

prince - "His height, long arms, good speed, agility and physicality make him an ideal press corner prospect," said Rob Rang, senior analyst for NFLDraftScout.com. "He appears to have the speed, open-field tackling ability and ball skills to potentially project as a free safety, as well. The teams I've spoken to about him believe he can remain at corner in the NFL and do quite well."

In fact, the 6-foot-1, 205-pound Amukamara is the top-ranked senior cornerback prospect and a potential top 10 selection, according to NFLDraftScout.com.

Prior to the beginning of the season, Amukamara was ranked the No. 1 senior prospect (regardless of position) by National Scouting, the organization that puts on the annual combine and is the preseason scouting service relied upon by over half of the league's teams.

Nebraska secondary coach Marvin Sanders, a former Husker defensive back, said Amukamara could play safety in the NFL because of his physicality.

"But I think where Prince will play is corner, because he's such an intelligent player," Sanders said. "He studies film, he studies receivers, so he has an idea of what guys are going to run against him, or what he's going to try to take away or give to him. That's a valuable thing to have at cornerback."

peterson - "There is no better cornerback in college football, and to be honest, it's not even close," draft analyst Mike Detillier said. "I see him as a top five or six pick at best and definitely a top 10 pick. He is the best cover corner out of the Southeastern Conference since Champ Bailey."

Bailey, a nine-time Pro Bowl selection who plays for Denver, was the seventh overall pick out of Georgia in 1999 by Washington.

"And Patrick is bigger and faster than Champ," Detillier said. "He has great ball skills you can't coach. No one can find the ball in flight the way he does. He thinks the ball's for him. In this day of big NFL receivers, Patrick's height and size are what make him unique."

Peterson has two interceptions on the season and five in his career with one touchdown, which are not bad numbers considering he is rarely thrown against. For example, LSU's other cornerback, Morris Claiborne, is No. 3 in the SEC this season with nine passes defended. Peterson has just two of those and zero pass breakups.

"I wouldn't throw to his side either," Detillier said.

Opponents have also stopped kicking to Peterson. He leads the SEC and is No. 5 nationally in punt returns with a 19.7-yard average on 17 returns, with touchdowns of 87 and 60 yards. He is also third in the SEC and 22nd nationally in kickoff returns with a 27.5-yard average on 19 returns.

"That's what really puts him in the top five or six in the draft," Detillier said. "It's amazing he has not been used as a kick returner before this season. He will definitely return kicks in the NFL. He's going to blow the socks off of those NFL scouts when he works out. Athletically, he's a cut above. In 27 years of studying the draft, he's the best defensive player I've ever seen at LSU."

DT/DE J.J. Watt (Wisconsin) 6-6/290/4.87
Watt's big plays at the end of Wisconsin's upset of Ohio State only accentuated what scouts already knew: The former Western Michigan tight end is growing into a potential star as a 3-4 five-technique.

Orlando Franklin, OT, Miami (Fla.)
Franklin is a top-line athlete but a bit of a raw prospect, but he has consistently improved every year and now projects as a high second-round pick who could sneak into the first round. He still must get stronger, but he is much better about maintaining his balance and playing under control to easily handle speed rushers and adjust quickly secondary pass-rush moves. He shows the ability to block effectively in the open field, especially adept at pulling to lead perimeter runs.
Franklin has improved a ton in '10 and with a great week of work at the Senior Bowl will continue his ascent up draft boards and perhaps become one of, if not the, first offensive tackle selected.

Da'Quan Bowers, DE, Clemson (junior)
We always thought of Bowers as a top-flight prospect, but until this year few talent evaluators agreed. The naysayers said he didn't dominate enough and lacked consistency as a pass rusher and thus pegged him as a third-round prospect.
This season, Bowers has eliminated all doubt. He has been a dominant player in '10, and there now is near-universal belief that he is the top defensive lineman in the '11 draft and a likely top-10 pick. Few ends can match Bowers' size, explosive power, quick hands and footwork, athleticism and pass-rush skills.

OG Keith Williams, Nebraska
This year, there doesn't seem to be any elite offensive guard prospects like Ben Grubbs, Brandon Albert or Mike Iupati, who were all guards chosen in the first round of recent drafts. There are a few interior prospects, however, who look like they could be solid starters at the NFL level.

One such player who doesn’t receive much attention is Nebraska’s Keith Williams, who has been one of the main big men up front paving the way for Nebraska’s ferocious rushing attack this year.

The 6'5" 315-pound Williams has been a three-year starter for the Cornhuskers. He looks like he has the strength and toughness to handle the trenches of the NFL.

Comment

That just made me sold on Peterson. And forget the talk of him at safety. I just hope we have the chance to get him. I was counting on the lions to easily have more wins than us, but now with stafford all but done I don't see that.

Comment

That just made me sold on Peterson. And forget the talk of him at safety. I just hope we have the chance to get him. I was counting on the lions to easily have more wins than us, but now with stafford all but done I don't see that.

Comment

We need some guys who can rush the passer. That would help the secondary out a bunch (not to say we don't need help there). We need a serious upgrade in the interior o-line. If we get a Mankins (maybe a dream, but who knows) in FA, a Bowers/Dareus type in the draft, and an NFL-caliber free safety, I think we're a playoff team in 2011 as long as Romo comes back healthy.

Comment

We need some guys who can rush the passer. That would help the secondary out a bunch (not to say we don't need help there). We need a serious upgrade in the interior o-line. If we get a Mankins (maybe a dream, but who knows) in FA, a Bowers/Dareus type in the draft, and an NFL-caliber free safety, I think we're a playoff team in 2011 as long as Romo comes back healthy.

First off, I don't care if we had a healthy Richard Seymour in his prime. That would NOT fix the problems we have in the secondary with Scandrick, Ball and Sensabaugh. So, no I am NOT a proponent of drafting DL that high in round 1. I always hear people say... fix the pass rush and that will fix the secondary. Well... that goes both ways, and people don't often see it that way. A lockdown secondary would equally help the pass rush. Don't get stuck thinking that things only happen in the trenches.

If we move to the 4-3, then fine... get me that big time DT. Otherwise, don't. It's just not worth it for the 3-4, because that's not where our main pass rush comes from. ..and part of the beauty of the 3-4 is finding 3-4 DEs are easier to do.

Comment

First off, I don't care if we had a healthy Richard Seymour in his prime. That would NOT fix the problems we have in the secondary with Scandrick, Ball and Sensabaugh. So, no I am NOT a proponent of drafting DL that high in round 1. I always hear people say... fix the pass rush and that will fix the secondary. Well... that goes both ways, and people don't often see it that way. A lockdown secondary would equally help the pass rush. Don't get stuck thinking that things only happen in the trenches.

If we move to the 4-3, then fine... get me that big time DT. Otherwise, don't. It's just not worth it for the 3-4, because that's not where our main pass rush comes from. ..and part of the beauty of the 3-4 is finding 3-4 DEs are easier to do.

Agreed we have some below average talent in the secondary, but you can mask that with a consistent pash rush and scheme. We have Scandrick and Sensabaugh playing major roles last year, and the D was great the last 8 weeks. Why? Alot of it had to do with the great pash rush Ware and Spencer were getting off the ends and Ratliff was getting up the middle. We're just not getting that this year, and it's killed us.

I'm not advocating we don't address secondary, because not addressing the FS position has been one of Jerry's absolute failures, but I am not sure all the blame/attention in the draft can go strictly to the secondary.

Comment

Agreed we have some below average talent in the secondary, but you can mask that with a consistent pash rush and scheme. We have Scandrick and Sensabaugh playing major roles last year, and the D was great the last 8 weeks. Why? Alot of it had to do with the great pash rush Ware and Spencer were getting off the ends and Ratliff was getting up the middle. We're just not getting that this year, and it's killed us.

I'm not advocating we don't address secondary, because not addressing the FS position has been one of Jerry's absolute failures, but I am not sure all the blame/attention in the draft can go strictly to the secondary.

But look at the names you just mentioned that generated the pass rush last year... Ware, Spencer, Ratliff. We're not gonna replace them to get more pass rush. Alternatively, look at our secondary.... We clearly have personnel moves to make. You said it yourself... you can mask the secondary's weakness. Key word "mask". Well, you can only "mask" things so long before NFL teams just expose you over and over again.

Here's the real question....

Are you seeing QBs sit there with all the time in the world before throwing the ball with success?

or

Are you seeing QBs get their passes off quickly with success?

If it's the former, then pass rush is an issue. If it's the latter then coverage is an issue. If it's both then... we gotta figure out which case is more common.

Look at the Chicago game.... We were all over Cutler in the beginning. Then Martz figured out that Cutler needed to get the ball out quicker, so he called for shorter passes and screens. He called plays that would reduce the time Cutler had the ball in his hands. The defense no longer had the time it needed to get to Cutler. Boom... Bears win.

Comment

But look at the names you just mentioned that generated the pass rush last year... Ware, Spencer, Ratliff. We're not gonna replace them to get more pass rush. Alternatively, look at our secondary.... We clearly have personnel moves to make. You said it yourself... you can mask the secondary's weakness. Key word "mask". Well, you can only "mask" things so long before NFL teams just expose you over and over again.

Here's the real question....

Are you seeing QBs sit there with all the time in the world before throwing the ball with success?

or

Are you seeing QBs get their passes off quickly with success?

If it's the former, then pass rush is an issue. If it's the latter then coverage is an issue. If it's both then... we gotta figure out which case is more common.

Look at the Chicago game.... We were all over Cutler in the beginning. Then Martz figured out that Cutler needed to get the ball out quicker, so he called for shorter passes and screens. He called plays that would reduce the time Cutler had the ball in his hands. The defense no longer had the time it needed to get to Cutler. Boom... Bears win.

Having watched enough of Pittsburgh over the last few years I would summarize the issue as the following

1) We generate good pressure but over rely on the ILB blitz.
2) ILB Blitz exposes the safeties and corners.
3) Our ILB, however, are not the best in space and it is clear to me we miss the Burnett/Carpenter types guys
4) Our Safeties are not play makers to begins with which further compounds the problem
5) Our DE are better suited for two gap given they don't have the speed or quickness to take advantage of one-gap

So, if we keep 3-4 my suggestions are

1) Play more zone and blitz less -- especially less ILB blitzs.
2) Find some ILB and S who have the athletics to play every down and intelligence to play zone.
3) If blitzing do more over loads on the tackles with a OLB, DB combination. Especially when teams go 4-5 WR. Zone reads

I feel one of the reasons Pittsburgh has been successful is not that they bring pressure every down but that they might the uncertainty effects the play calling and makes for shorter drops.

With the Cowboys you could read the blitz and as a result audibles killed us becasue they could isolate our guys easily.

With Pittsburgh calling an audible might kill your QB or put you into a 2 WR route with 7 covering. Neither good situation. In addition, their ILB cover a-lot of ground if teams throws slants or screens and that makes a huge difference.

So while I don't like of ILB and S talent for the 3-4 -- I think this past week you saw Pasqualoni mix it up quite a bit and it helped. Not terribly fantastic but better in spite of the CB issues we had.

I mean, remember when we killed our Coaches when other teams did not have starting CB and we could not pass the ball .... sort of happened this week to some degree to the GMen. yards, not alot of points and turnovers.

Comment

Having watched enough of Pittsburgh over the last few years I would summarize the issue as the following

1) We generate good pressure but over rely on the ILB blitz.
2) ILB Blitz exposes the safeties and corners.
3) Our ILB, however, are not the best in space and it is clear to me we miss the Burnett/Carpenter types guys
4) Our Safeties are not play makers to begins with which further compounds the problem
5) Our DE are better suited for two gap given they don't have the speed or quickness to take advantage of one-gap

So, if we keep 3-4 my suggestions are

1) Play more zone and blitz less -- especially less ILB blitzs.
2) Find some ILB and S who have the athletics to play every down and intelligence to play zone.
3) If blitzing do more over loads on the tackles with a OLB, DB combination. Especially when teams go 4-5 WR. Zone reads

I feel one of the reasons Pittsburgh has been successful is not that they bring pressure every down but that they might the uncertainty effects the play calling and makes for shorter drops.

With the Cowboys you could read the blitz and as a result audibles killed us becasue they could isolate our guys easily.

With Pittsburgh calling an audible might kill your QB or put you into a 2 WR route with 7 covering. Neither good situation. In addition, their ILB cover a-lot of ground if teams throws slants or screens and that makes a huge difference.

So while I don't like of ILB and S talent for the 3-4 -- I think this past week you saw Pasqualoni mix it up quite a bit and it helped. Not terribly fantastic but better in spite of the CB issues we had.

I mean, remember when we killed our Coaches when other teams did not have starting CB and we could not pass the ball .... sort of happened this week to some degree to the GMen. yards, not alot of points and turnovers.

I bolded the parts I liked in your post. How it affects the draft will be uncertain until we know who our coaches are and what changes are made. But if we stick with the same staff/scheme, I agree with some of the stuff you said.

...also, your reading is hard to decifer sometimes. I think you're just typing to fast or something, but can you write so we can understand you more clearly?

Comment

I bolded the parts I liked in your post. How it affects the draft will be uncertain until we know who our coaches are and what changes are made. But if we stick with the same staff/scheme, I agree with some of the stuff you said.

...also, your reading is hard to decifer sometimes. I think you're just typing to fast or something, but can you write so we can understand you more clearly?

A good 3-4 uses lots of underneath zone with 3 LB always in coverage. This is something I found lacking in the Wade 3-4. I think also a good Wade 3-4 requires DE that can play one-gap and we don't have that. Spears, Igor, Canty before them..... all 3-4 DE. Hatcher, Bowen, Ratliff I think have more positional flexibiltiy given their quickness. We just have a bit of a miss-mash of talent in the front 7 and I am not sure our D philosophy has ever been set long enough for anything to take root.

But to me, we have personnel to play D closer to what Parcells/Belichek would do. Thump'em, keep'em in front and pray for a few turnovers due to the Offenses mistakes. With Wade, so much is predicated on the blitz creating big plays -- that is to say the D forces the turnovers mores so than the Offense makes mistakes.

Hope that helps, I do type too quick and thoughts get jumbled up. Sorry.

Moving ....

Here is a name I love Vontaze Burfict -- don't know if he comes out given he is a bit crazy and only a sophomore. But that is an ILB. Maybe a better 4-3 Prospect than 3-4 but man that is the mindset I want on D minus the PF.

Comment

But look at the names you just mentioned that generated the pass rush last year... Ware, Spencer, Ratliff. We're not gonna replace them to get more pass rush. Alternatively, look at our secondary.... We clearly have personnel moves to make. You said it yourself... you can mask the secondary's weakness. Key word "mask". Well, you can only "mask" things so long before NFL teams just expose you over and over again.

Here's the real question....

Are you seeing QBs sit there with all the time in the world before throwing the ball with success?

or

Are you seeing QBs get their passes off quickly with success?

If it's the former, then pass rush is an issue. If it's the latter then coverage is an issue. If it's both then... we gotta figure out which case is more common.

Look at the Chicago game.... We were all over Cutler in the beginning. Then Martz figured out that Cutler needed to get the ball out quicker, so he called for shorter passes and screens. He called plays that would reduce the time Cutler had the ball in his hands. The defense no longer had the time it needed to get to Cutler. Boom... Bears win.

We're 29th in points allowed, 20th in sacks, 24th in INTs. Clearly the D needs some work, haha. My whole point is not to dismiss our secondary needs (we clearly need a FS, and a nickel CB at least), but to point out that we need to generate more consistant pressure as well. We have Ware, who else can do it consistantly? The question/debate is what to do if the 2 CBs are off the board, and you don't see the value in drafting OL (we draft in the 5-10 area). Or what to do if all our options are on the board (we draft in the top 3 area). It's going to be interesting to discuss going forward.

Comment

I think you make yourself a big board of the top 32 or so guys in the Draft......Regardless of position...Then you knock of, the few positions we truly do not need. (QB, WR, RB, TE, give or take a position here) At this point your list should be around the range of 15-20 maybe even less. You then proceed the player highest rated there with the pick.

Drafting for need can cause many more problems than it solves. Drafting the best player can also but it tends to happen less.

Thanks to bonekrusher for the sig

Comment

I think you make yourself a big board of the top 32 or so guys in the Draft......Regardless of position...Then you knock of, the few positions we truly do not need. (QB, WR, RB, TE, give or take a position here) At this point your list should be around the range of 15-20 maybe even less. You then proceed the player highest rated there with the pick.

Drafting for need can cause many more problems than it solves. Drafting the best player can also but it tends to happen less.

I've always said BPA according to need. So I agree with your statement there.

Comment

We're 29th in points allowed, 20th in sacks, 24th in INTs. Clearly the D needs some work, haha. My whole point is not to dismiss our secondary needs (we clearly need a FS, and a nickel CB at least), but to point out that we need to generate more consistant pressure as well. We have Ware, who else can do it consistantly? The question/debate is what to do if the 2 CBs are off the board, and you don't see the value in drafting OL (we draft in the 5-10 area). Or what to do if all our options are on the board (we draft in the top 3 area). It's going to be interesting to discuss going forward.

Well, when you're in November and the draft is in April, I know some people like to lock themselves into thinking who the top prospects are... but the fact is that a lot changes between now and then.

So when you say what to do when the top 2 CBs are off the board... and there is no OL worth taking... I think you're trapping yourself a little bit. For me, I like to project more than others. ie. I don't think Marcel Dareus is the top DT. I don't even think Cameron Heyward is a 1st rounder. Amakumara is not locked in as my #2 CB. Wisneiwski is a late 2nd/early 3rd rounder, imo... not a 1st rounder. Yet, people are saying he is right now. I know everyone has their own projections and I can be totally off (like I am frequently). So the debate on who to take will be a fun one all the way to the end. The way I look at it is... don't lock yourself into thinking about prospect values, but rather... draft strategy... what are your needs vs wants, which positions are deeper than others, which positions are typically first round worthy, how to avoid drafting busts, who are the sleepers, who's flying under the radar, who's overrated, how can you maximize each draft pick, what are Jerry's tendencies, fitting personnel to scheme.. etc etc. That's what I think about when I make my mocks and I talk draft.